Talk:One: The Movie

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 June 2021. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.

Alternative views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Reviews need to be cited, otherwise the notability for this article is not established. The article also reads like an advertisement. It appears that the movie received rather poor reviews. The article needs to reflect this. --dab (𒁳) 13:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I disagree. Until you reference what you state its POV --HumusTheCowboy (talk) 23:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete

This is an advertising piece for a non-notable movie. I'd suggest it get deleted, and if someone wants to rewrite it from an NPOV, it might be somewhat interesting. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

I thought so at first, too, but the sheer number of google hits appears to establish it as notable. We do have many articles on movies with lesser notability. dab (𒁳) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm somewhat convinced. But the article is still a mess. It really is just a press release. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh there are far worse articles that have been on Wiki for years. The topic is notable enough, it may need some reworking thats all. I may do it --HumusTheCowboy (talk) 23:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]